When the planes hit on 9/11, Michael Moore's new book, Stupid White Men, was all printed. As it was a scathing onslaught on the morals of George W. Bush and his associates, that did not seem like a grand time to release it. His publisher spoke of pulping the press run and either forgetting the whole matter or, if Moore was amenable to a rewrite, issuing a much toned-down version. Moore was not amenable and, after much yelling and probably some threats, the book is now out in its original form.
I haven't read it yet but even if it's wildly off-base, inaccurate and foolish, it could do a lot of damage to George W. Bush, his administration and all that his supporters hope he achieves. Why? Because, as I write this, Stupid White Men is number one on both the Amazon.Com and Barnes & Noble best seller lists. As Moore is just beginning a major book tour, it will probably reside on or about the top of the sales charts for a while.
I am not suggesting that anything Moore wrote or that he might say on talk shows will change a lot of minds. America doesn't work that way. Still, he may accomplish two things that could cause Bush & Co. a load of grief. One is that he may make it, if not fashionable then at least not as unconscionable to attack the President. A lot of folks who might be slamming Bush have been laying low, lest they be accused of treason, and this may give them the courage to speak out. And the other thing Moore's book may accomplish is to demonstrate that a person can step up to big pay in the fast-paced world of Bush-bashing.
I'm going to show my cynical side here: I think we overlook how much of our public discourse is in the hands of pundits and columnists who have two priorities and, often, the one that advances liberal or conservative causes is not, to them, the more important of the two. The other is personal fame and fortune. They say what gets them on TV and makes money. I don't mean they don't believe what their shpiels — though a few sure seem like they'd renounce every position they hold for the right price. Arianna Huffington, for instance, seems to have found the competition among attractive conservative women too fierce and decided to stake out her turf in liberal country.
No, I mean even the pundits who earnestly hold the convictions they voice have learned that it's good business to be relentless and even to exaggerate those convictions. It sure works for Talk Radio hosts. (And I dunno…if you found that espousing some opinion made you rich and famous and caused audiences to cheer you, might you not tend to become more convinced of it?)
Early in the Clinton Administration, several publishers and pundits discovered that there was moola to be made from attacks on Bill and Hillary. Even when Clinton had his 78% approval rating, the remaining 22% of America was willing to shell out serious coin for books that said Slick Willy had been running drugs and having people murdered while he was busily boffing trollops in the Lincoln bedroom. There was — and in some circles, still is — a hatred out there that liked to hear that William Jefferson Clinton was the Anti-Christ, and some didn't even seem to care if the charges were dubious or disproven. I was genuinely disappointed when Peggy Noonan — someone I'd kinda admired — wrote her anti-Hillary screed. It was kind of like, "I don't have anything of substance to say about Hillary Clinton but I can't miss this chance to get a book on the Best Seller list."
Michael Moore may or may not have anything of substance to say about the current Oval Office occupant. That may not matter. What does matter is that Michael Moore is atop the Best Seller list. If he's there a while, a lot of someones will decide — if they haven't, already — that Bush-hating may be even more lucrative than Clinton-hating. And of course, the books don't even have to be true. They just have to be vaguely credible to those who already hate the guy. Clinton was vulnerable because of all the rumors of his womanizing and sleazy business deals. Bush is vulnerable because of all the rumors of his drug use and sleazier business dealings. The latter may make excellent fodder for further best sellers as more corporations go the way of Enron and the public loathing for the Ken Lays of the world intensifies. Whether it's valid or not — and nowhere here am I suggesting it is or isn't — it will not be hard to whip up volumes that portray our current Prez (and even his father and Veep) as having habitually made millions off business deals where everyone else got screwed.
I said here before that I didn't think Enron would directly hurt Bush. I don't believe anyone will ever draw a connection of the "smoking gun" variety between him and any illegal actions. On the other hand, he will never shake the association with corporate rape. And Moore's book will spawn others…because he's proving that there's money in proclaiming the scandals of the Bush Administration. And the buying public always gets what it wants…